Artstation prints

Started by N-drju, September 21, 2020, 03:04:40 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

WAS

#15
Blah blah blah blah. Classic missdirection.

Simple fact. Pixels do not exist in the real world. Printers use DPI even if they say PPI for ease of use. Dots don't exist in digital space, as it's a spacial calculation for print. It's actually super simple. PPI is used to calculate the DPI for print.

go look at some printer manuals. Lol

https://castleink.com/blogs/printer-help/inkjet-printer-resolution-dpi-printer-guide

Quote from: undefinedBasically the term DPI refers to the resolution of the printing device, where PPI refers to the resolution of the image itself. How can you remember this? Monitors display pixels, and printers produce dots.
This is why people are confused, and further confused when someone is talking about DPI in Photoshop or elsewhere, when they are specifically referring to the final printed medium, and the printer using PPI to calculate DPI per that printers capabilities and settings.

WAS

#16
And again, this irrelevant arguing is pointless and ridiculous. He must set the Document Resolution to appease the PPI requirement, and subsequently the minimum DPI requirement for a good print. You guys are ridiculous. No matter how you argue it, the printer is using PPI to calculate DPI, as that's how printer resolution works. And he is specifically trying to print with Art Station. I'd honestly give higher PPI images. If that's there only option you should look into far better options out there to provide prints or canvasses. Render as big as possible, or use stitching method gone over here in the past for a final massive image you can use for super detailed prints you can walk right up on.

Kadri

"You guys are ridiculous"
I have friends who work in those print houses and have worked in prints since 1994 more then ones.
This is the reason i find you amusing in your arrogance Jordan. I don't get even angry at you ;D

WAS

What do you think you're even arguing? You've done nothing but throw out links on this forum, which are not citable, and other sources which go over what I've summarized multiple times. I don't even think you have any idea what you're doing and just arguing to argue. Using playschool antics "my dad is better then your dad" friends. Lol None of this means anything, and your friends will probably summarize the same thing I have.


sboerner

*Sigh* And apologies to N-drju for hijacking your thread.

Long story short, if you use the pixel dimensions that Artstation recommends, you will be fine. And as I mentioned before please let us know how everything works out. There's nothing like a large high-quality print to show off a great image.

Kadri

I don't want to take this unnecessary longer then needed.
But just for others who might get confused from our debate we had here, this is from Artstation:

"Note: Don't confuse PPI (Pixels Per Inch) with DPI (Dots Per Inch),
which refers to the approximate number of ink droplets the printer heads spray onto the media.
Although the PPI is 300, the printers themselves operate at a much higher DPI (Dots Per Inch) up to 2400x1200dpi
and potentially even higher in the future to achieve amazing quality."

https://help.artstation.com/en/articles/86-image-requirements-for-prints

Dune

Amusing discussion, thanks guys ;D

N-drju

Who would have thought I would cause such a carnage with just a handful of questions? ;D I am a master troll!! ;D

PPI is definitely not a DPI. Even I know it already despite never before having to think about such issues.

Here's some more bad news for you Jordan. This is a screenshot from the Artstation help center itself;

artstscreen.png

Case close I'm afraid... Or is it...? :D

@sboerner - Thank you very much for the Afinity Photo tip! The price is indeed very attractive! Even if used just as a "diagnostic measure", it shall be good value for money. :)
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

N-drju

Oh, and by the way - the sizes advertised on the print help page are fixed. Artstation has answered my e-mail. So I need to re-render my images... :(
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

N-drju

Quote from: sboerner on September 21, 2020, 07:43:07 PM*Sigh* And apologies to N-drju for hijacking your thread.
That's okay, no offence taken.  ;D ;D ;D
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"

sboerner


WAS

#27
Quote from: N-drju on September 22, 2020, 02:07:40 AMWho would have thought I would cause such a carnage with just a handful of questions? ;D I am a master troll!! ;D

PPI is definitely not a DPI. Even I know it already despite never before having to think about such issues.

Here's some more bad news for you Jordan. This is a screenshot from the Artstation help center itself;

artstscreen.png

Case close I'm afraid... Or is it...? :D

@sboerner - Thank you very much for the Afinity Photo tip! The price is indeed very attractive! Even if used just as a "diagnostic measure", it shall be good value for money. :)

I never said PPI was DPI, it's the equivalent in digital space. PPI is digital. DPI is physical. Even your screenshot from Art Station explains this.

The reason they say this is you can give images a EXIF label of DPI (digital camera can do this). Photoshop doesn't do this. You use document resolution, which tags the image with XResolution and YResolution instead of a ratio for a DPI label which will tell the printer to print at 300 DPI unless manually changed.

However setting your PPI allows printers to calculate the DPI for that image. Notice how they say what I said about printers not being at a 1:1 ratio for DPI anymore (unless a scanner). That's where the calculation comes in.

Again, you set PPI in Resolution which WILL be used by the printer to calculate DPI to print. When you set PPI it's not setting "300" or whatever you punch in in the EXIF data, it sets the documents X and Y PPI resolutions. If you were to give it a DPI label (which photoshop doesn't do) it would set a DPI of 300, which would tell the printer to print at 300, period, cause that's the header label the printer reads. That's why they tell you not to set a DPI for the file. You kinda gotta understand what's actually happening to the file. But if you are familiar with Phothoshop and printing your art, you know PPI is XResolution and YResolution is how DPI is calculated on a printer. Like they noted, and I noted, you can provide files at much higher XResolution and YResolution for better results, and they seem to be wanting to go even further.

There is just fundamental misunderstandings all abound. Lol

FYI the DPI label for image headers is deprecated as far as I know, when you talk about setting the DPI today, it's always referring to setting XResolution and YResolution (Not Width/Height). You could take a 300 PPI image and stamp it with 72 DPI and it would override printer results and ruin the image. This is why it's especially important. However, again, PPI is directly being used to calculate DPI, inherently.

WAS

If PPI wasn't being used for DPI calculation like all modern printers do, you can guarantee they wouldn't tell you to up PPI to 300 from 72, which would ruin print. Lol

N-drju

Well, one thing I know from the two days research is that there is the widespread (alas erroneous) acceptance of the term "DPI" to stand for "pixels per inch". How absurd! This perpetuates the misconception.

Why, even the properties window in operating systems display DPI instead of differentiating between the two. Even Affinity Photo has the "DPI" in resizing options, admitting "it is actually PPI, but we have named it DPI for convenience sake"! No, this is very inconvenient, because I just don't know what to think - if it's really PPI or DPI that I change...

It's ironic that a program as simple as paint.NET (which is basically an "MS Paint wearing makeup") got this right. Still, it doesn't change the fact that an image correctly resized in paint.NET is still displayed as having "300 DPIs" in the Windows Explorer properties window. ::)
"This year - a factory of semiconductors. Next year - a factory of whole conductors!"